The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

?php
>

Monday, May 9, 2016

We’re not Moving from the Golan Part 2: Talking about Israel behind her Back - Pazit Rabina

If and
when the conflict in Syria enters the phase of a final status agreement, Israel
will find it difficult to continue to keep a low profile for much longer.

Whether by chance or not, on the same
day in which De-Mistura’s document
listing points of agreement was published, the UN’s Human Rights Council decided
to condemn Israel for violating the rights of the Druze in the Golan.
Coincidence? Not necessarily. Especially since this happened during the five years when
Asad has been slaughtering his own people; now is the time that the UN
Human Rights Council decided to condemn Israel for abusing and violating the
human rights of the Druze in the Golan Heights. Among the states voting for
condemnation of Israel were the usual suspects: Cuba, Venezuela and the Arab states,
but Russia, Israel’s great friend, was also among them - Russia, with whom
Israel’s military coordination has become quite intimate.

One might say that we need not make anything out of this. Russia
strikes a balance between her clientele in Damascus and the Arab states and her warm
relations with Israel. But Israel must not downplay the Russian vote in the UN Human
Rights Council or ignore it. Surely not after all of the efforts that she has invested
in order tobattle the organization that
has become the UN’s number one tool for attempting to isolate Israel. Ignoring
the vote of a friend, particularly a friend, would be a sort of boomerang. An “own
goal”. The government of Israel must have a backbone facing Russia, even in
matters such as these. Especially if the
Russian-Israeli cooperation, which is successful at present, will, in the
future, evolve and consolidate into a Russian presence in the Golan as part of
the future solution in Syria. The entire Middle East is changing, breaking
apart and being built anew, and what was thought in the past to be unthinkable
could become standard afterward.

Yes, even though Netanyahu’s declarations regarding the
Golan Heights yielded mainly international criticism, it seems that as a result
of those declarations, the days of Israel’s uninvolvement in Syria are
drawing to an end. The doctrine of disengagement regarding Syria has been considered
very successful until now. It has allowed Israel to remain an “island of
stability” in a stormy sea of volatility in the Middle East. However, if and
when the conflict in Syria enters the phase of a final status agreement, Israel
will find it difficult to continue to keep a low profile for much longer.

Soon after the signing of the nuclear agreement with Iran, there
were those who said that a similar model should be used in the future with Syria. One lesson learned from the agreement with Iran is that it is better for Israel to be
an active participant behind the scenes with her friends, despite the
significant areas of disagreement with them. The Golan Heights represent a
classic example in which Israel has an interest in cooperation with Russia and
the US, individually, so that she will not find herself faced with a joint
initiative by Kerry and Lavrov defining
a comprehensive agreement in Syria in which she will be required to abandon the
Golan.

Former cabinet secretary Zvi Hauser wrote an interesting
post in Facebook one day before the ceasefire took effect in Syria. “The time
has come for Israel to take an active step and begin to float, carefully and
resolutely – especially among our friends – her essential strategic interest in
the “new order” to exist in Syria of the future: recognition of the Israeli Golan, which
represents one percent of the land that was once the Syrian state”. Israel must
also have a standing in the process of formulating the new status of Syria. “Israel
must be a partner either directly or indirectly in the internationaldiscussion from the start, and not only at
the end, after everything has already been ‘cut up’ and agreed to”.

What Hauser is actually saying is that the international positions
regarding the future agreement in Syria are being locked in, and Israel must
not miss the historic opportunity to anchor Israeli interests in the Golan
Heights. Moreover, all of the states that are relevant to the matter are
clearly and publicly marking their interests. A passive Israel might come into
the picture too late, and therefore miss the historic opportunity to have an
influence on the shape of the new borders in the Middle East.

Is this what suddenly caused Prime Minister Netanyahu to
bring the government up to the Golan for a meeting, to repeat the declaration
that the Golan Heights will remain in
our hands at a photo-op during a military exercise, and then to repeat it a
third time and say it clearly in Putin’s ear and to the rest of the world? Is
this a trial balloon, and if so, what is behind the extra repetition of the statement?
Is it the fear that we are missing the train?